Canon EF 800 f/5.6L IS IIMore mentions of a new 800mm lens hitting the Canon lineup in the next 12 months. I’m told Canon is not to be outdone by Nikon and their upcoming lightweight 800 f/5.6 VR. A new “6 stop” IS system is also being tested in prototype EF 800 f/5.6L IS II lenses, but may not be . The weight of Canon’s next 800 will be less than the current EF 600 f/4L IS II, which is the way it was with the current 800 and the previous 600.

There are other suggestions that the supertelephoto lineup could become more crowded with zooms, and new 400mm primes. With the production and development issues of the current set of new “big whites”, a timetable for such lenses is nearly impossible to nail down.

Built-in ConvertersThe EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x with the built-in 1.4 teleconverter is not the only lens planned to have the technology. It will definately be the first, and may be the only one for a while, but the concept is being tested with other zooms as well as prime lenses.

One possible configuration mentioned is a lens similar to the Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 OS. With Canon’s weight saving materials, the viability of a hand holdable 300 f/2.8 zoom has improved.

While there’s nothing imminent outside of the much talked about EF 200-400 f/4L IS, it looks like the 1.4 built-in teleconverter could become a broad feature in Canon’s lens lineup.

referring to Sigma's 120-300 f/2.8 OS as a point of comparison for a future Canon 120-300 f/2.8 IS +1.4x is laughable. they're aimed at almost entirely different markets and buyers. please, don't get people excited about the possibility of a f/2.8 telephoto zoom coming from Canon in the $3K price range. this thing is likely going to cost $9K, and probably won't arrive until christmas 2016.

referring to Sigma's 120-300 f/2.8 OS as a point of comparison for a future Canon 120-300 f/2.8 IS +1.4x is laughable. they're aimed at almost entirely different markets and buyers. please, don't get people excited about the possibility of a f/2.8 telephoto zoom coming from Canon in the $3K price range. this thing is likely going to cost $9K, and probably won't arrive until christmas 2016.

I don't think any reasonable person would think a Canon zoom would be priced similarly to a third-party zoom of the same specifications. By competitor, Craig is stating it would be so on a focal length, aperture, and feature standpoint. You buy third-party gear for the better price, and name brand gear for the quality (in most cases) at a higher cost. If one party does not have a piece of equipment with similar specifications that the other does (think Canon 200mm f/2L, 8-15mm Fisheye or Sigma 50-500mm, 12-24mm, 120-300mm), there is no competition in that segment.

I don't think any reasonable person would think a Canon zoom would be priced similarly to a third-party zoom of the same specifications. By competitor, Craig is stating it would be so on a focal length, aperture, and feature standpoint. You buy third-party gear for the better price, and name brand gear for the quality (in most cases) at a higher cost. If one party does not have a piece of equipment with similar specifications that the other does (think Canon 200mm f/2L, 8-15mm Fisheye or Sigma 50-500mm, 12-24mm, 120-300mm), there is no competition in that segment.

Kyle, I get what you mean. but I feel that your last sentence, while generally accurate, leaves out the issue of price. not only does a piece of equipment need similar specifications, it needs to be somewhere in the same ballpark in terms of price. these days it doesn't feel like canon and sigma are even playing in the same time zone. I realize why this is a mutually beneficial arrangement from a business standpoint, as the consumer I can't help wishing for a more competitive landscape. I guess that's where Sigma is starting to go with new lenses like the 35 f/1.4; I can only hope that this trend continues. I'd love to see Sigma try their hand (as they have in the past) with high quality superteles with their new quality and design measures in place.

Kyle, I get what you mean. but I feel that your last sentence, while generally accurate, leaves out the issue of price. not only does a piece of equipment need similar specifications, it needs to be somewhere in the same ballpark in terms of price. these days it doesn't feel like canon and sigma are even playing in the same time zone. I realize why this is a mutually beneficial arrangement from a business standpoint, as the consumer I can't help wishing for a more competitive landscape. I guess that's where Sigma is starting to go with new lenses like the 35 f/1.4; I can only hope that this trend continues. I'd love to see Sigma try their hand (as they have in the past) with high quality superteles with their new quality and design measures in place.

I can definitely see your point. The new Sigma 35 f/1.4 seems to perform just as good as the Canon 35mm f/1.4 for a much lower cost (TDP ISO 12233 Comparion - just posted today). As long as 3rd party manufacturers continue to challenge Canon in the build quality, image quality, and features department, Canon will eventually be forced to lower costs. We will all win when 3rd parties can consistently manufacture good lenses.

thanks for the digital picture link. I'd actually say, as far as shooting ISO 12233 charts goes, the Sigma wins over the Canon all the way up until f/5.6, where it's dead even. not a huge difference, but it is beating a lens that costs about 50% more, and it's winning where, let's be honest, we all want to use a f/1.4 lens: at apertures wider than f/2.8.

I am excited to see how Canon responds when they issue the new 35 f/1.4 L II. will it still follow the current trend and essentially double the existing price of the 35 f/1.4 L?

The EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x with the built-in 1.4 teleconverter is not the only lens planned to have the technology. It will definately be the first, and may be the only one for a while, but the concept is being tested with other zooms as well as prime lenses.

Way back before I was yelling at kids to get off my lawn, some lenses came with a "matched multiplier," which would, at least in theory, give better results than a generic 1.4X converter. Examples that come to mind would be the Nikon 300mm f/2.0 and the Tamron 300mm 2.8. This seems like an interesting throwback to an old (but good) idea.

A 70mm~210mm f/2.0 w/ built-in matched 1.4X would extend to (in rounded numbers) 100mm-300mm f/2.8. This would of course be very pricey, but it would also be a daily workhorse for a lot of people, especially news and event photographers.

The EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x with the built-in 1.4 teleconverter is not the only lens planned to have the technology. It will definately be the first, and may be the only one for a while, but the concept is being tested with other zooms as well as prime lenses.

...A 70mm~210mm f/2.0 w/ built-in matched 1.4X ...

I'd sell a liver for such a lens. (You can get by on just one.)

You would have to, based on the price of the PRIME 200mm f/2, and the fact it would be the first f/2 zoom ever with an image circle for a 35mm format.

I believe the rumor is the possibility of a 120-300mm f/2.8 1.4x TC (to give 168-420mm f/4 with the TC engaged). The overall dimensions of the lens might not be very different from the 70-210mm you stated (especially with regards to objective lens size), but the pricing for the two and internal design would be very different. Either way, this theoretical lens would be a baby Siglauncher (aka. Sigzilla, 200-500mm f/2..

But now that I think of it, wouldn't the 120-300mm (168-420mm f/4) conflict with the 200-400mm f/4L IS 1.4x USM? Is there a point (for Canon) to produce both? Wouldn't the 120-300mm have to be cheaper to justify its existence? I know it's just a rumor, I'm just thinking out loud.

The EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x with the built-in 1.4 teleconverter is not the only lens planned to have the technology. It will definately be the first, and may be the only one for a while, but the concept is being tested with other zooms as well as prime lenses.

scottc

I would be so intrigued by an L series 120-300 2.8 competitor! I've been tempted quite a few times over the past few months to pull the trigger on the Sigma, but haven't because of it's AF problems (which are even worse w/a tele converter).